Chalk+v.+United+States+District+Court

Chalk v. United States District Court Central District of California United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit Argued November 10, 1987; Decided November 18, 1987

Background: Appellant, Vincent L. Chalk, was a teacher of hearing-impaired students in California. Under undisclosed circumstances, Chalk contracted A.I.D.S. The officials of the school system in which he was employed relieved him from his teaching position upon discovering that Chalk indeed had been diagnosed as having A.I.D.S. School officials then relocated Chalk into an administrative position. Chalk filed action in an attempt to reposition himself in his original occupational capacity. The district court denied Chalk’s motion for a preliminary injunction.

Decision and Rationale: The order of the district court denying Chalk’s motion for a preliminary junction was reversed by the United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit after Chalk appealed the lower court’s decision. Evidence before the district court indicated the casual contact incident to the performance of his teaching duties in the classroom presents no significant risk of harm to others. Under Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, Chalk is qualified to perform his job. Preventing Chalk from resuming his position subjects him to “irreparable injury.” The court ordered Chalk be returned to his “former duties as a teacher of hearing-impaired children.” The court also reasoned that, “to allow the court to base its decision on the fear and apprehension of others would frustrate the goal of section 504,” referring to public fears and perceptions of having a teacher with A.I.D.S in the classroom.

Impact: Under Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, a teacher does not have to disprove all feasible theoretical instances of potential risk or harm if the teacher is infected with something like A.I.D.S. This is an extremely contemporarily contentious issue in education. Parents, students, and colleagues of teachers who have diseases such as A.I.D.S. often discover dissention among opinions. A consensus with a definitive stance on the matter is lacking because there are various nuances and complications which enhances the issue’s sensitivity. Nonetheless, all parties vested in public education have to accept the fact that teachers with an epidemically associated disease such as A.I.D.S. are protected and maintain primary roles in classrooms.

Quiz Question:

True or False?

A teacher with A.I.D.S. has no legal precedence or point of reference protecting their right to teach. Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 has no relevance.


 * Completed Independently by Stehen Brooks

Submitted by Jose Ramirez Chalk v. United States District Court

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit Argued November 10, 1987 Decided November 18, 1987

BACKGROUND: Mr. Vincent L. Chalk was a teacher of hearing-impaired children in the Orange County Department of Education. He was relieved of his duties as teacher because of his conditions as an AIDS patient. The Department of Education felt that his condition posed a threat to the children under his care, as well as the other teachers and staff in the school.

DECISION AND RATIONALE: The decision given by the U.S. Court of Appeals was to restore Mr. Chalk to his previous position, as teacher of hearing-impaired children. The Court agreed that Mr. Chalk was handicapped because of his AIDS condition, however casual contact incident while performing his duties as teacher, posed no significant risk to his students or staff. Since he was classified as handicapped, Mr. Chalk qualified for protection, under section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973.

IMPACT ON TEACHING: This case deals with discrimination in the work place. It is not up to our employers to decide what medical conditions are hazards to others. Although the Orange County Department of Education acted on behalf of the safety of their students and staff, they inadvertently discriminated against Mr. Chalk, for his medical condition. This type of discrimination should not be tolerated by anyone in the school system. Although this case deals directly between employer and employee, it is important to understand that section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 offers protection, from discrimination, to all classified as handicapped.

QUESTION: TRUE OR FALSE – A medical condition, such as AIDS, is not considered a handicap.

Sandra Hansen Chalk v. United States District Court Central District of California United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit Argued November 10, 1987; Decided November 18, 1987 Background: Mr. Vincent L. Chalk taught hearing-impaired children in the Orange County Department of Education. Chalk contracted AIDS and was relieved of his duties as teacher as a result of his condition. The Department of Education felt that his condition posed a threat to the children under his care so he was placed into an administrative position. Chalk filed a motion in order to get his position back and it was denied. Decision and Rationale: The U.S. Court of Appeals overturned the decision given by the district court. The order was to place Mr. Chalk back into his previous position. The court indicated that Mr. Chalks contact with the students pose no major threat or risk of harm to others. Under Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, Mr. Chalk is qualified for protection and the court decided there was no evidence proving he could not do his job. Impact: Employers need to be careful that in their efforts to protect the students, that they are not mistakenly discriminating against others. While AIDS can be frightening to the uneducated, it is harmful to all people to discriminate out of fear. Fortunately, employees are protected under Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973. Question: What Act protects individuals who suffer from medical conditions such as AIDS?